On the recordOctober 24, 2017
I thank my colleague from Rhode Island for that very pertinent question. Before I answer it, I thank him for his service as his State's attorney general and his State's U.S. attorney. He has as much experience as I do, and I know he appreciates that there are countless examples of exactly the kind of predicament he has so well described. The harm to each individual may be measured in tens of dollars, but the harm nationally to consumers may be measured in millions of dollars. If each of those consumers is forced to arbitrate, the result at best would be a few dollars to each of them, and most of them will abandon the claim because the services of an attorney or even the time they have to take to appear before a panel of arbitrators simply won't be worth it. The harm is not only to them, as my friend and colleague from Rhode Island has implied so well, it is to the consumers of the future because without public knowledge of the defective product or the predatory lending or the sexual harassment, that same harm will happen again and again. To take the topic of the day, sexual harassment, many of those employment clauses had the forced arbitration requirement that led to settlements and secrecy. For years and years, that harm was repeated to women who suffered because they were unaware of the harm about to befall them.…





